E
Eden
Guest
Good to know. Thanks.
- Status
J
Justice2006
Guest
And also consider the following review on a book–**The Gospels of Mary : The Secret Tradition of Mary Magdalene, the Companion of Jesus ** *by Marvin Meyer, Esther A. De Boer *:
One of the foremost scholars on Gnosticism now explores the fascinating and often misinterpreted woman known as Mary Magdalene.
Following the recent whirl of interest in Mary Magdalene that was generated by The Da Vinci Code, Marvin Meyer (The Ancient Mysteries) delves into the earliest texts available to reveal a disciple of great spiritual maturity who was extremely influential in the survival of Christianity. Although he is doubtful of the grand conspiracies laid out in The Da Vinci Code, Meyers does believe that it was institutionalized sexism that caused Mary to be deliberately “marginalized” as a prostitute in the New Testament.
“The portrait of Mary in literature and art as a reformed whore is impressive, but it is mistaken in terms of historical accuracy and literary interpretation,” he asserts. "…It was not until the late sixth century that Pope Gregory the Great formally identified Mary Magdalene with the prostitute of Luke 7, and the identification stuck."
In fact, Meyer claims that there is no convincing documentation to link Mary with the unnamed prostitute who washes Jesus’ feet with her tears. Using his scholarly authority as well as extensive research supplied by Esther A. De Boer, Ph.D. (Mary Magdalene: Beyond the Myth), he helps Mary emerge from the shadows of Orthodox Church and gain her rightful place as the highly influential disciple and apostle of Jesus.
He believes that Mary had a physical love relationship with Jesus, and was probably the mysterious “beloved” disciple that is mentioned in the Gospel of John. Furthermore, he believes that Jesus may have seen Mary as the most spiritually evolved disciple. Much of the book includes quotes and interpretations of the earliest literary sources available, including the recently discovered Gospel of Mary (written in the second century), as well as the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, Peter, Thomas, and Phillip. *–Gail Hudson *
and:
Indeed, as has become better known in the past generation, there were many more gospels floating around the early Christian world than the canonical four (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John), most of which were lost to the world through various processes. Among the stronger early traditions that later got branded as heretical was the Gnostic tradition, and in this community, Mary Magdalene had a place of honour. – FrKurt Messick, a priest in the Anglican/Old Catholic tradition
[amazon.com/gp/product/0060727918/ref=pd_sbs_b_2/104-3882750-5090362?_encoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155]](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060727918/ref=pd_sbs_b_2/104-3882750-5090362?_encoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155])
.
One of the foremost scholars on Gnosticism now explores the fascinating and often misinterpreted woman known as Mary Magdalene.
Following the recent whirl of interest in Mary Magdalene that was generated by The Da Vinci Code, Marvin Meyer (The Ancient Mysteries) delves into the earliest texts available to reveal a disciple of great spiritual maturity who was extremely influential in the survival of Christianity. Although he is doubtful of the grand conspiracies laid out in The Da Vinci Code, Meyers does believe that it was institutionalized sexism that caused Mary to be deliberately “marginalized” as a prostitute in the New Testament.
“The portrait of Mary in literature and art as a reformed whore is impressive, but it is mistaken in terms of historical accuracy and literary interpretation,” he asserts. "…It was not until the late sixth century that Pope Gregory the Great formally identified Mary Magdalene with the prostitute of Luke 7, and the identification stuck."
In fact, Meyer claims that there is no convincing documentation to link Mary with the unnamed prostitute who washes Jesus’ feet with her tears. Using his scholarly authority as well as extensive research supplied by Esther A. De Boer, Ph.D. (Mary Magdalene: Beyond the Myth), he helps Mary emerge from the shadows of Orthodox Church and gain her rightful place as the highly influential disciple and apostle of Jesus.
He believes that Mary had a physical love relationship with Jesus, and was probably the mysterious “beloved” disciple that is mentioned in the Gospel of John. Furthermore, he believes that Jesus may have seen Mary as the most spiritually evolved disciple. Much of the book includes quotes and interpretations of the earliest literary sources available, including the recently discovered Gospel of Mary (written in the second century), as well as the Gospels of Mark, Matthew, Luke, John, Peter, Thomas, and Phillip. *–Gail Hudson *
and:
Indeed, as has become better known in the past generation, there were many more gospels floating around the early Christian world than the canonical four (Matthew, Mark, Luke and John), most of which were lost to the world through various processes. Among the stronger early traditions that later got branded as heretical was the Gnostic tradition, and in this community, Mary Magdalene had a place of honour. – FrKurt Messick, a priest in the Anglican/Old Catholic tradition
[amazon.com/gp/product/0060727918/ref=pd_sbs_b_2/104-3882750-5090362?_encoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155]](http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0060727918/ref=pd_sbs_b_2/104-3882750-5090362?_encoding=UTF8&v=glance&n=283155])
.
B
Booklover
Guest
More Muslim propaganda! Islam is a man made religion started by a man who was a master at mind/thought control among other things. The fact remains that your Quran, which you believe to be the actual word of God, states that THE SUN SETS IN A MURKY SPRING and THAT THE STARS WERE CREATED AS MISSILES TO CHASE DEVILS AWAY!
ARE THESE THE WORDS OF GOD OR NOT?
Vickie
E
Eden
Guest
If this thread is going to veer of course from the discussion about Muhammed and his consummation of marriage with Aisha, then please create a new thread.
L
LilyM
Guest
Keep trying J2006.
Mary is clearly NOT the ‘disciple Jesus loved’ - read John 20: 4-6 - ‘Peter went forth, and that other disciple [the one ‘Jesus loved’] … and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre … and HE [other disciple] … went not in [to the Sepulchre], then cometh Simon Peter following HIM’.
This mysterious disciple also goes fishing with the other (male)Apostles later - do you think they would have had a lone woman in the boat with them? I doubt it. And the very fact that the so-called alternate Gospels were lost and rediscovered hundreds of years after they were written shows that they were not the Word of God - God certainly does not permit his word to be ‘lost’!
All the Gospels (even the so-called ‘lost’ ones) apart from the
Gospel of Mary seem to agree that Jesus never had a physical relationship and certainly never married - why should we believe it rather than them?
Mary is clearly NOT the ‘disciple Jesus loved’ - read John 20: 4-6 - ‘Peter went forth, and that other disciple [the one ‘Jesus loved’] … and the other disciple did outrun Peter, and came first to the sepulchre … and HE [other disciple] … went not in [to the Sepulchre], then cometh Simon Peter following HIM’.
This mysterious disciple also goes fishing with the other (male)Apostles later - do you think they would have had a lone woman in the boat with them? I doubt it. And the very fact that the so-called alternate Gospels were lost and rediscovered hundreds of years after they were written shows that they were not the Word of God - God certainly does not permit his word to be ‘lost’!
All the Gospels (even the so-called ‘lost’ ones) apart from the
Gospel of Mary seem to agree that Jesus never had a physical relationship and certainly never married - why should we believe it rather than them?
B
Booklover
Guest
The Gnostic gospels are heretical and have been disproved by the Church. My Lord and Savior did not marry Mary Magdalene as these disgusting writings say!
These heretical teachings have been brought out to further discredit the church, but nothing that you or Islam or anyone says or does is ever going to destroy the Church that Jesus Christ established for all mankind!
Vickie
J
Justice2006
Guest
Hi Booklover,
Are you really that childish in nature not to comprehend the anti-Islam false propaganda?
It is the Arabic text that is considered the Word of God and not the words choosen by the English or any non-Arabic translator while translating the Original Arabic Text of the Koran.
And Muslims have preserved the Original Arabic Revealed Text of the Koran.
Ms.LilyM,
For various factors and reasons, Jews/Christians did not/could not preserve the actual words revealed by God or actual words that were uttered by the Prophets in their native languages. What you now have/and discovered thus far is two groups/collections of ancient or *most ancient * manuscripts of OT/NT, written/narrated by mostly UNKNOWN authors, because the Originals were either lost or sometimes **destroyed ** by Christians themselves. Here is some info from your own Catholic Catechism:
**Catholic Catechism - Lesson 17: **
Materials Used In Composing The Bible
- What has become of the original copies of the Bible?
**They have been either destroyed or lost. **[* A Catechism Of The Bible]](* A Catechism Of The Bible])
[*]What were the causes of destruction or loss?
**Many, particularly persecution and the fragility of the materials used, which did not withstand the ravages of time. **
[*]How was persecution a cause for the loss or destruction of the originals?
Sometimes the Christians themselves destroyed the original to prevent profanation at the hands of the pagan persecutors; some other times they were found and destroyed by the pagans. The persecution of Decius (Roman Emperor from 249 to 251) was particularly vicious in this regard.
M
Muslima
Guest
Dear Brothers and Sisters
Peace be upon you,
I have little things to say about the marriage of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to Aisha.
When Muhammad proposed to Aisha she was nine years old, Abu Bakr said that he can not give her in Marriage to Muhammad, U know why? because SHE WAS ENGAGED TO ANOTHER MAN, it means that this was the traditions of that age, to propose to girls, Aisha was at the age of marriage according to the idias of that age and she had other suitors.
The puperity age for girls in the hotter countries is earlier than the puperity age in cold countries, (I live in the east and I know this fact). The puperity age at our countries is between 9-11.
It was a tradition in these countries, that the girl marries when she reaches puperity, the custom was like that till the 19th century, we all used to hear stories about our great grandmothers, who were still playing with other girls till they got married, this was an old tradition is eastern societies regardless the religion.
When Mohammad as a man not as a prophet made a choice to marry, he married his first wife Khadija who was older than him, he was married to her when he was twenty five and never married another woman till she died when he was fifty.
If Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was something abnormal at that age, we would have find his enemies at that time, trying to hint to this incident and take it as something bad of him, but we never knew that his contemporary enemies attacked him from that point.
It was narrated that many men at that age, either moslems or non moslems used to marry much younger girls, it was the tradition of that time.
Peace be upon you
Muslema
Peace be upon you,
I have little things to say about the marriage of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) to Aisha.
When Muhammad proposed to Aisha she was nine years old, Abu Bakr said that he can not give her in Marriage to Muhammad, U know why? because SHE WAS ENGAGED TO ANOTHER MAN, it means that this was the traditions of that age, to propose to girls, Aisha was at the age of marriage according to the idias of that age and she had other suitors.
The puperity age for girls in the hotter countries is earlier than the puperity age in cold countries, (I live in the east and I know this fact). The puperity age at our countries is between 9-11.
It was a tradition in these countries, that the girl marries when she reaches puperity, the custom was like that till the 19th century, we all used to hear stories about our great grandmothers, who were still playing with other girls till they got married, this was an old tradition is eastern societies regardless the religion.
When Mohammad as a man not as a prophet made a choice to marry, he married his first wife Khadija who was older than him, he was married to her when he was twenty five and never married another woman till she died when he was fifty.
If Muhammad’s marriage to Aisha was something abnormal at that age, we would have find his enemies at that time, trying to hint to this incident and take it as something bad of him, but we never knew that his contemporary enemies attacked him from that point.
It was narrated that many men at that age, either moslems or non moslems used to marry much younger girls, it was the tradition of that time.
Peace be upon you
Muslema
B
Booklover
Guest
:clapping:
Justice2006:
If this were true, how come Muslims have not bothered to correct these lies?
That is the lamest excuse I’ve heard in a long time! And you call me childish? Now I’ve heard it all!
Vickie
By the way, when the real Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, descended on the apostles at Pentecost, he gave them the gift of tongues. They could preach the gospel in their own language and other people heard them in theirs! Now that is efficiency!
Our Triune God is awesome!:clapping: 
So the so-called “Word of God” cannot even be translated properly into other languages? Translators have put in these most definitely not divine, but very 7th century remarks in their translations simply to defame Islam? That is hilarious!
If this were true, how come Muslims have not bothered to correct these lies?
That is the lamest excuse I’ve heard in a long time! And you call me childish?
Now I’ve heard it all!Vickie
By the way, when the real Paraclete, the Holy Spirit, descended on the apostles at Pentecost, he gave them the gift of tongues. They could preach the gospel in their own language and other people heard them in theirs! Now that is efficiency!
Our Triune God is awesome!:clapping:
E
Eden
Guest
This is off topic again but there are contradictions between the teachings of Jesus and those of Mohammed. For instance, Jesus turns water into wine. Muslims believe God does not condone the consumption of wine, don’t they? Jesus taught that marriage is a Sacrament and that one man marries one woman. Muslims believe that God allows multiple wives at once, don’t they? If these things are true, and I could be wrong, did God change His mind about wine and the Sacrament of marriage in the 600 years between Jesus and Muhammed? Catholics do not believe God contradicts Himself so this is difficult for us to understand the inconsistencies of teachings between what you believe are two prophets.
B
Booklover
Guest
Sorry, but it’s easy to get off track when dealing with Justice2006!
Vickie
Vickie
J
Justice2006
Guest
R
Rodrigo_Bivar
Guest
Wrong. I wouldn’t call Moiz Amjad an Islamic scholar. An Islamist polemicists, yes, but a scholar, no.
The only ‘doubts’ were brought up by Muslims who don’t like the ‘Aisha was 9 years old’ sahih hadiths. I should think Shaykh Haddad did a good job in debunking them. In fact, Haddad said they were lie (his words) and his opponents was a liar (his words) and dishonest (his words).
No, lies and dishonesty are not doubts. But that is only my opinion. What do you think?
That’s one step better than you, buddy. You didn’t provide any evidence she was past the age of puberty either.
I guess Ibn Hajar’s summation of the scholarly opinion that she was before the age of puberty was incorrect because you dislike it?
Sahih Bukhari Volume 8, Book 73, Number 151
Narrated 'Aisha:
I used to play with the dolls in the presence of the Prophet, and my girl friends also used to play with me. When Allah’s Apostle used to enter they used to hide themselves, but the Prophet would call them to join and play with me. (The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.) (Fateh-al-Bari page 143, Vol.13)
See this bit about: The playing with the dolls and similar images is forbidden, but it was allowed for 'Aisha at that time, as she was a little girl, not yet reached the age of puberty.
What does that mean?
Au contraire – see my Tabari hadith that says Muhammad had sex with her at her house. And then the Sahih Muslim hadith that says he brought her home with him and her dolls were with her.
This means he had sex with her in her house (i.e. her father’s house) and then took her and her dolls home to his house. Is that clear dating or what?
Then there’s the Abu Dawud hadith which places her at age 14 and still playing with dolls. I repeat: 14 years old.
Please read carefully, pro_universal. Don’t just claim I never provided dating. The dating is there – you just have to read with an open mind.
No. Scholars since Bukhari, Tabari, Muslim, Ibn Majar, Abu Dawud and Nas’ai have understood that she was nine.
It is only the modern day Islamists ashamed of their prophet’s behavior have sought to obfuscate the issue by issue what Shaykh Gibril Haddad has labeled as lies and deception.
I hope people will read my link reference of Shaykh Haddad to see for themselves what he actually said and how he actually damned the ‘Aisha was not nine’ Islamists. I’m too polite repeat his words. Blush. Blush.
This is a lie. Ibn Hajar lists the scholars who agree that Aisha had not reached the age of puberty when she was 14, including the Jumhoor (i.e. the majority of scholars) in his time. You just have to read Fateh al Bari.
Now, since we know from multiple accounts that Aisha had sex with Muhammad when she was 9 – she must have been still before the age of puberty then because she was still hadn’t achieved puberty when she was 14. I repeat 14 years old and she’s still hadn’t achieved puberty.
My case does not have any problems. I have a collection of hadiths that all say she was nine when Muhammad had sex with her. Readers can see I’ve debunked all your ‘Aisha was not nine’ claims. If you have any fresh ones please bring so I can debunk them as well.
You have merely brought some ‘modern’ Islamist apologetics that use rather convoluted and plainly erroneous reasoning to argue that she was older than nine. These have been shown to be lies and deception (Shaykh Haddad’s words). Thus, I think you’re the one without the leg to stand on.
Chau,
Mata Moro
R
Rodrigo_Bivar
Guest
No. There was no minimum age for engagements.
This is untrue. See mum.org/worldmen.jpg
Modern scientists have found no significant difference between the ages of menarche (i.e onset of puberty) in hot and cold countries.
This is untrue of the Muhammadans of the 7th century. Ali bin Abi Talib married a THREE YEAR OLD toddler, Princess Sherbanu, when he was 32 years old. Later Ali became caliph.
Now tell us how a three year old girl had reached the age of puberty and was thus ready for marriage?
Chau,
Rodrigo
I
inJESUS
Guest
Here you are again Justice, jumping and digressing…open new threads and no not keep digressing coz it’s getting boring.
YOU STILL DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION:
mohammad said allah will preserve the Bible.
So if allah did not keep his promise :
was allah not omnipotent?
was allah a discrimminator?
i hope you will answer it this time. And keep track please with the thread…morality of a 53 year old “prophet” who is the example to follow marrying a baby girl with dolls…and later about the Muhallil morality when a woman cannot return to her first husband unless she marries another ( what God in the Bible calls SHAMEFUL) and later even polygamy…mohammad’s moral commandmants are Amoral to the Biblical God…here you are, prove the morality first of his “holy” marriage that allah promised him in his dream ( did this ever happen to a biblical prophet ?)
PS: Pro-Universal, stop lying…absolutely nobody buys it you are a Christian…stop claiming it otherwise your posts will be marked as :lying. It’s just an advice if you want people to read your posts.
YOU STILL DID NOT ANSWER MY QUESTION:
mohammad said allah will preserve the Bible.
So if allah did not keep his promise :
was allah not omnipotent?
was allah a discrimminator?
i hope you will answer it this time. And keep track please with the thread…morality of a 53 year old “prophet” who is the example to follow marrying a baby girl with dolls…and later about the Muhallil morality when a woman cannot return to her first husband unless she marries another ( what God in the Bible calls SHAMEFUL) and later even polygamy…mohammad’s moral commandmants are Amoral to the Biblical God…here you are, prove the morality first of his “holy” marriage that allah promised him in his dream ( did this ever happen to a biblical prophet ?)
PS: Pro-Universal, stop lying…absolutely nobody buys it you are a Christian…stop claiming it otherwise your posts will be marked as :lying. It’s just an advice if you want people to read your posts.
J
Justice2006
Guest
Mr. inJESUS,
I believe I did answer those questions either in this or other thread but probably you did not pay attention to it.
Anyways you asked:
So if allah did not keep his promise :
was allah not omnipotent?
was allah a discrimminator?
First, I need to know where in your scriptures, Allah told you that He will preserve your Bible?
If He did preserve His Bible where is it? and which version out of the thousands of so-called ancient and *most ancient * manuscripts, is Promised Word of your God? Because as we know NO TWO of THEM are identical. (I am not talking about English versions). I am talking about the so-called Hebrew/Greek versions from where **more corrupted translations ** were made with **pick and choose ** method to accomodate your own churches pre-conceived dogmas/concepts/views.
Once you show me and prove it to me that Version X out of your various different Bibles, is the true Word of your Allah, and then show me that in it He did promise you to preserve it then I can answer the rest of your questions whether: was allah not omnipotent? and was allah a discrimminator?
PS: Keep in mind that according Catholic Catechism, even **Catholic Bible ** does not contain full deposit of Catholic faith, let alone other Protestant Bibles which are considered corrupted/based on pick-and-choose method in Papacy’s view.
.
R
Rodrigo_Bivar
Guest
Hmmm… I guess it’s okay as that would mean I’m as uncivilised and just as plain rude as Their Most Catholic Majesties Ferdinand and Isabella.
Chau,
Matamoro
R
Rodrigo_Bivar
Guest
Dear Mr Justice2006,
Please keep to the subject of this thread and I’ll be appreciative if you wouldn’t clutter this thread with irrelevancies.
Thank you.
Hasta la vista,
Rodrigo
Please keep to the subject of this thread and I’ll be appreciative if you wouldn’t clutter this thread with irrelevancies.
Thank you.
Hasta la vista,
Rodrigo
P
pro_universal
Guest
I would say so. Calling yourself “Muslim killer” and championing two of the most violent monarchs known to mankind makes you no better than the white supremacists who constantly malign Jews. You are also apparently incapable of carrying on a dicussion without repeating the same claims as if they are new.
In reply to your post on Aisha, all I can say is: Reread my post where I detail points 1 and 2.
- There is scholarly disagreement as to the age of Ayesha. Ibn Hisham is not a modern Islamist; he’s one of the earliest writers. Gibril Haddad is not the final word on all hadiths.
- Even then, you failed to provide any evidence that Aisha was pre-pubescent at the time of the consummation (which is different from the time of the betrothal, a fact you are confusing.)
If anything, the repeated propaganda pieces and use of “muslim killer” as a moniker are demonstrating that you come from and admire a defective culture of violence. Not that good if you want to criticize Muslims, imho.
J
Justice2006
Guest
Mr. inJESUS,
I already addressed your above post/questions and I raised some basic questions whose answers are due on you.
In the mean time, I would allow Ellen G. White to tackle one of your questions (i.e whether Allah (The God) did keep/preserve His Word?)
As you already know Ellen.G. White, was a ‘prophetess’ of the 7th Day Adventist Church, in her Bible Commentary (Volume 1) she says:
The Bible we read today is the work of many copyists who have in most instances done their work with marvellous accuracy. But copyists have not been infallible,and GOD most evidently has not seen fit to preserve them altogether from error in transcribing.
But still she adds:
’I saw that GOD had especially guarded the Bible,'
But:
’yet when copies of it were few, learned men had in some instances changed the words, thinking that they were making it plain, when in reality they were mystifying that which was plain, by causing it to lean to their established views, which were governed by tradition.'
I know, Ellen G. White may be a cultist in your eyes…but this is what she observed about the nature of her Bible and what games have been played by the COPYISTS of the Bibles and whether God of the Bibles is seen fit to preserve COPYISTS altogether from error in transcribing.
.
- Status